Video: The angriest atheist

posted at 7:21 pm on July 21, 2014 by Allahpundit

To cleanse the palate (sort of?), this is 18 months old and apparently went viral at least once before but somehow it flew under my radar — and Ed’s, and Lachlan Markay’s, and Charles Cooke’s. Sorry to mention you, boys, but when coming late to a vid that so many others have seen, I find it’s a comfort to be able to hide in a crowd. (Ed, after reading the draft of this post, e-mailed to say, “No one is under the delusion that I’m hip.”)

The question: Is it real? I had my doubts. This line especially seems a shade too oblivious to be sincere:

“I’m sick and tired of Christians being tolerated. You need to do something about Christians on here. I don’t feel comfortable with them.”

That reads like broooad satire of the secularist POV but if you believe the man who filmed it, it’s on the level. He was at Sproul Plaza in — where else? — Berkeley when the jogger happened by and stopped to chat. I’m still not sure I believe it, though. Maybe that’s just my own inner atheist refusing to accept this guy as part of the group, but I think it has more to do with the performance. No one uncorks a rant this histrionic, with so many oddly comic moments, without preparing, right? The “democracy is mob rule!” slo mo is worthy of an SNL short. And the guy with the sign seems a little too patient, even though he’s clearly winning this “debate” by letting the jogger scream himself hoarse. Things this magical simply don’t happen spontaneously in a godless universe. Hmmmmm.

Lots of profanity here so please observe your official content warning. And before you start asking in the comments, no, my first meeting with Ed was nothing like this. Except for me being barefoot, I mean.

thatsafactjack, you’ll notice it’s folkz LOWER on the academic totem pole who get the shaft…. they aren’t giving up their tenure track positions or taking on more classes or the like… economic justice/diversity on the back of SOMEONE else.

I made it through a few seconds of that insanity.
You can sum up that video with the phrase…”Drugs are bad”
I’m sure I’ll be seeing him in the ICU with an overdose any day now…

I can tell you a few things…
He is not Southern–his accent is pure California
He may or may not be an atheist or a Jew, but he is nuts.
I agree with Axe–he’s stoned.
I have seen his type before, many times, in the psychiatric lockdown. A few days of meds and he’ll be much better.

They justified this, invariably, by invoking ‘diversity’ and ‘economic justice’ and made themselves feel better by declaring that the student who was cheated of the seat and the opportunity it represents, the education, career, and chance at the life they’d earned, would ‘get a seat in a program somewhere else’.
thatsafactjack on July 21, 2014 at 8:57 PM

Government-sponsored racism, like the Equal Employment Opportunity Council (EEOC), affirmative action and the like should be repealed. SCOTUS in it’s opinion for Schuette v Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, et al, this year made a big step toward stopping it–yet it continues.

IMHO, until a lot of that affirmative action manure is gotten off the books, we will continue to have government-sponsored racism.

I’ve also seen faculty intentionally lie to a student asking a direct question regarding whether they’d be able to garner employment with the degree they were pursuing, knowing that the student wouldn’t likely ever be able to find work in that field, simply to keep them in the program so that they could keep their own paycheck rolling in. Students who were older, students who didn’t have any connections in that particular field they’d chosen, students who were simply pursuing a degree with very limited employment options, etc.

Rather than tell the truth and see the student change their major, these ‘educators’ chose to lie to protect their own department and career.

Hey. First, wish you well. Just to be honest, I was one of those that was not college material way back when. I could play footie and was able to get in on a scholarship. Barely could read and full of problems. Without a doubt kids better than me and who had worked hard all through high-school…one did not get into a pretty good school because of me.

I took my opportunity and ended up with a bunch of things you hang on the wall. Not sure of my point other than without the helping hand way back then….you would not have to read my dumb thoughts 50 plus years later.

I’ve also seen faculty intentionally lie to a student asking a direct question regarding whether they’d be able to garner employment with the degree they were pursuing, knowing that the student wouldn’t likely ever be able to find work in that field, simply to keep them in the program so that they could keep their own paycheck rolling in. Students who were older, students who didn’t have any connections in that particular field they’d chosen, students who were simply pursuing a degree with very limited employment options, etc.

Rather than tell the truth and see the student change their major, these ‘educators’ chose to lie to protect their own department and career.

thatsafactjack on July 21, 2014 at 9:09 PM

Darwinists also have been known to lie to protect not only their careers, but also their religion:

A football scholarship, or any sports related scholarship, is earned by dint of hard work, commitment and talent.

I’d say you earned your seat through that medium.

I’m discussing people who are placed in seats they have, in no way, earned.

Simply being born to a certain race, ethnic group, or marking down a specific sexual orientation on an admission application shouldn’t qualify any candidate for a seat in a college program. Ever. But particular not because some academics are more concerned with grooming their own ideology rather than rendering fair and impartial education to those who demonstrate the ability to succeed.

As a matter of fact, the state of California constitution expressly and explicitly forbids that kind of preferential treatment and consideration. This law was passed when the state was anxious to protect minorities from discrimination during the mid 1960’s. Today, the academics in California are attempting to strike down the equality law to allow open discrimination based on immigration status, poverty, and skin color. Ironic, isn’t it?

As a matter of fact, the state of California constitution expressly and explicitly forbids that kind of preferential treatment and consideration. This law was passed when the state was anxious to protect minorities from discrimination during the mid 1960′s. Today, the academics in California are attempting to strike down the equality law to allow open discrimination based on immigration status, poverty, and skin color. Ironic, isn’t it?

thatsafactjack on July 21, 2014 at 9:21 PM

Cause their definition of “fair” is better than yours…/typical white tower type…

Doesn’t seem out of norm for the intolerance bunch. You don’t have to work hard at all to find atheists angry at believers, it’s about like pro-choicers angry at pro-lifers, or union goons angry at right-to-workers. All are unreasonable, and many (not most) get violent.

My definition is pretty basic: those who have worked hard to demonstrate the ability to succeed and/or excel in the program, and the commitment to finish the program, should receive first consideration for admission and placement.

My definition is pretty basic: those who have worked hard to demonstrate the ability to succeed and/or excel in the program, and the commitment to finish the program, should receive first consideration for admission and placement.

thatsafactjack on July 21, 2014 at 9:32 PM

In the mind of the liberal, that makes you a racist and a bigot and ignorant of all the intolerance and oppression that __________(fill in your favorite wannabe a victim group here) has had to put up with. Obviously we must favor these disadvantaged, whether or not there was any actual discrimination, because that’s the only way to make up for their past mistreatment, even if it was only imaginary or ginned up to make liberals feel guilty. That way, liberals can feel good about themselves again. And to them, that is all that matters.

I don’t know what Charles is on about: I’ve debated enough atheists (and gay “rights” supporters and abortionists…usually the person is all three) and they have openly stated their hostility and intolerance of Christianity. On one site, a guy I chose not to respond to is satisfied that Christians are being discriminated against because of all the homophobia Christians have heaped on gays.

No tolerance of intolerance. Someone here once posted a poem, which certainly bears again being entered into the record:

The Angry Manby Phyllis McGinley

The other day I chanced to meet
an angry man upon the street —
a man of wrath, a man of war,
a man who truculently bore
over his shoulder, like a lance,
a banner labeled “Tolerance.”

And when I asked him why he strode
thus scowling down the human road,
howling, he answered, “I am he
who champions total liberty —
intolerance being, ma’am, a state
no tolerant man can tolerate.

“When I meet rogues,” he cried, “who choose
to cherish oppositional views,
lady, like this, and in this manner,
I lay about me with my banner
till they cry mercy, ma’am.” His blows
rained proudly on prospective foes.

Fearful, I turned and left him there
still muttering, as he thrashed the air,“Let the Intolerant beware!”

I have seen his type before, many times, in the psychiatric lockdown. A few days of meds and he’ll be much better.

Doc Holliday on July 21, 2014 at 9:05 PM

Note that for all of his histrionics, he does not touch the man with the sign. He is abusive, intolerant, loud, and aggressive, but not violent. I don’t think he needs meds, I think he needs a better debating coach. He lost completely on style, and I can’t say much even for his content, for I think many more have died at the hands of atheists than have ever died at the hands of Christians. Certainly Hitler was not a Christian, although he played on the vanities of Christians like a violin.

The question for atheists is this: If another atheist murders, even in the name of atheism, does that negate the philosophy of atheism? I would say “no” because each person is responsible for their own crimes — their own abandonments of their ethics system. I submit that an ethical atheist, while denouncing the laws of God, must, of necessity, embrace “the natural law”. The natural law says to treat others with respect, to not steal, to not murder, to render aid when one sees affliction. So, the ethical atheist must hold fast to these things, which the Christian would say are laws imbedded into our being by God. They may be honored in their ignorance more than in their observance, but they are there.

I would have liked to have seen Mr Atheist pull that on the Muslim Students Association, though…. not sure if the Muslims, or the cops, or the Administration, or his fellow Leftist would have been there with clubs, first.

JFKY on July 21, 2014 at 8:25 PM

Here in central PA there was a Halloween parade a few years ago in which militant atheists marched in. One was dressed as a zombie pope. The other was dressed as zombie Muhammed. Guess which one got attacked (in a town full of catholics/christians).

There is one or more of the following at play in this video:
1)Mental illness
2)Acting
3)Drugs

I’m leaning towards #3–probably LSD, maybe mushrooms or PCP, and perhaps a few other things. The agitation, constant hair stroking, bare feet, and incoherence all make me think it’s at least one heavy psychadelic, and perhaps even meth.

This reminds me of a joke that my friends and I made up some time ago. It concerned a fictional CNN debate between a Christian and Atheist. The atheist winds up ranting and raving like a loon, like the guy in this video, and storms off the set after destroying some of it. He’s chased down by various camera men and reporters and security personnel, and finally cornered in a bathroom. Back to the wall, he screams “I AM NOT AN ANIMAL! I AM A HUMAN BEING!” One of the security guards sternly informs him “Then you are subject to the LAW!” The Atheist, panicking, looks to the left, and then to the right, and then screams at the throng “I— AM— AN ANIMAL!!!”

Two extremes here. Yes, how not to defend atheism … and how not to defend faith in a deity. “Yep, I’m going to stand here, hold my sign and all the atheits are just going to change their mind.”

comet on July 21, 2014 at 7:35 PM

I dunno, man, I think five minutes of silence got about half the crowd to think he was the rational one with a reasonable message to share. What alternative course of action do you think would have given him a better chance of softening hearts and opening minds?

But not on cement!
I had a pair of those Vibram FiveFingers “toe shoes” and they were great for hiking or jogging on dirt paths or grass, but even a quarter mile walk on concrete was brutal punishment.

But not on cement!
I had a pair of those Vibram FiveFingers “toe shoes” and they were great for hiking or jogging on dirt paths or grass, but even a quarter mile walk on concrete was brutal punishment.

joe_doufu on July 22, 2014 at 1:15 PM

I would think the whole thing is a good way to get your bare foot covered in dog poop, but to each his own.

And yeah, we all remember being barefoot on a hot sidewalk as a kid… jogging like that across campus can’t be pleasant. Though we all know that Christian intolerance is the true cause of blisters.